In building retrofit applications, it is often desirable to incorporate thermal insulation for the purpose of achieving cost savings and improved energy efficiency. While certain thermal insulation materials are affordable, the overall costs of installing thermal insulation in existing buildings, otherwise known as façade retrofit projects, tend to be expensive. This is due, in part, to existing buildings being structurally diverse with external façades that may include variations. Unfortunately, in order to accommodate these myriad façade variations, current retrofit approaches result in cumbersome and inefficient solutions that fail to produce optimal long-term energy savings.
In a typical retrofit process, multiple stages exist, including: documentation, design, fabrication, installation, and maintenance. With current retrofit approaches, however, inefficiencies arise at each stage, thus contributing to a likely failure to achieve optimal long-term energy savings. For instance, during the documentation stage, e.g., capturing information regarding the façade of a building, challenges exist due to myriad variations in existing buildings, such as walls that are not plumb, windows of various sizes, and unique elements including rain pipes, gutters, and window trim. Most retrofit projects are not carefully documented beforehand, as quick on-site visual surveys and recording of the most basic measurements are the prevailing documentation methods. While better design solutions can be derived when more detailed information is available, detailed façade documentation is often omitted as it is time consuming and therefore expensive.
After the documentation is complete, the insulation may be designed so as to be customized according to the particular façade. However, most current façade retrofit projects are rarely designed beforehand. This is especially true for single family residences and other small-scale projects. Instead, projects are realized through on-site decision-making based upon contractor experience and standardized detailing solutions of systems available on the market. This approach often results in problems that are hard to correct afterwards, have poor thermal performance, and increase long term cost. Further, as design consultation is expensive, it is mostly omitted from the delivery process.
Like the design process, the typical fabrication and installation processes also involve a great deal of on-site labor. For instance, materials are typically transported to the construction site where they are cut to size, attached to the building, and finished in-situ using labor intensive methods, e.g., exterior insulation and finishing system (EIFS). These construction processes can be time consuming, subject to inclement weather, affected by differences in worker skill levels, and often resulting in material waste.
The final step in the typical retrofit process is the maintenance stage, as retrofitted structures require constant maintenance and may also undergo alterations over their lifespan. Also, the structure's façade may be modified over time, and as a result, the insulation is required to be modified accordingly. Moreover, when damage occurs or maintenance is needed, on-site repairs and alterations need to match existing systems.
Problems encountered in a typical retrofit process can be difficult to correct afterwards, thereby increasing long term costs. Current deficiencies in façade retrofit processes can be especially problematic for small-scale retrofit projects, such as residences, where fabrication and installation are primarily motivated by a desire to reduce maintenance and improve appearance, and not necessarily to increase thermal performance.